Hello folks! I have taken Petra's suggestion to start a new thread for those of us who wish to continue arguing, thus leaving the other thread to get back on track. Hope people agree!
So, when I simply state what I see in the score (and in the work when it is performed) is an "analysis". The fact that this can be done by anyone in the same way, if he/she follows the score, I don't know what kind of analysis it is, much more what kind of "evaluation". Chris, following the same process, he simply stated: "couldn't agree more". Even if this is an analysis, where is the analogy with the sports pundits. Am I going to be wrong, when I simply state what I see there in the definitive score? Is my "analysis" anything original compare to what says the score and the work itself?
Parla - thanks for your likewise civilized response to me above, but as far as this one goes to Tagalie, if T will not mind me butting in, I am going to have to spend some time tomorrow am trying to decode or deconstruct this paragraph! I ain't got a clue what it means!Seriously.